But make no mistake: This was a glorious moment in the Senate’s history and another big step forward in the inevitable march toward full equality for gays. It was striking to see how the debate has changed with time, how one can almost see the arc of history bending toward justice for gays.

The notion of civil unions, for example, was once seen as a way to ensure full rights without offending the traditionalists. It was rightly dismissed yesterday as an imposture for the real thing, as weak and phony as the promise of separate-but-equal schools in old Mississippi.

Christie is sticking to that idea, saying that perhaps some tweaking of the civil union law can finally end the continuing discrimination by hospitals, insurers and employers.

He misses the point. It is offensive to establish a second tier for gays.

Gone, too, are the days when supporters of gay marriage danced around the fact that bigotry is at the core of the opposition: “The state should not be in the business of legally sanctioning homophobia,” Sen. Loretta Weinberg (D-Bergen) said. “This is not steeped in traditional values. It is steeped in prejudice.”

Group opposing gay marriage bill rallies outside Trenton Statehouse A small group of protestors gathered outside the Statehouse in Trenton to express their opposition for gay marriage bill (S1). Sponsors of the bill say they have enough votes to pass it, although Gov. Chris Christie has promised to veto it, saying he wants to put a referendum on the ballot in November instead. Neither house is expected to have enough yes votes to override the Governor's veto. (Video by Andre Malok / The Star-Ledger)

Experience has changed this debate, as well, by refuting the notion that gay marriage is somehow a threat to traditional marriage. Six states now have full marriage equality, and somehow, traditional marriages have survived the blow. That scare tactic has been exposed.

Senate President Stephen Sweeney (D-Gloucester) abstained in the vote on marriage equality two years ago for political reasons and almost immediately regretted it.

Yesterday, he finally had the chance to make amends. “What is silly is that we have to debate something as elementary as equal protection under the law for all citizens,” he said.

Next up is the Assembly, which is expected to pass this bill on Thursday, and then comes the governor’s veto. Christie says he wants to put the issue before voters, a move as clever as it is cynical. It will give him and fellow Republicans a place to retreat that sounds respectable — at first blush.

But it would be as wrong as holding a referendum on interracial marriage, which most Americans opposed until the mid-1990s, despite the Supreme Court striking down Virginia’s ban three decades earlier.

Opposing gay marriage: it's an "old person thing"Ledger Live for February 13, 2012 - Ledger Live with Brian Donohue. As the New Jersey State Senate votes to legalize same-sex marriage the Star-Ledger's video webcast provides a video time capsule of sorts, providing for future New Jerseyans a look at what will no doubt seem strange in 40 years or so: a world in which gay marriage is illegal. The reason for the inevitable change: poll numbers showing a stark generational difference in opinions on gay marriage, with overwhelming support among voters under 35 years of age.

So the real fight will be to gather enough votes to override the veto, which can be done anytime during this two-year session. That job is made more difficult by the defection of two Democrats, Sens. Ron Rice of Essex and Jeff Van Drew of Cape May.

But two principled Republicans had the courage to defy the governor yesterday, Sens. Jennifer Beck of Monmouth and Diane Allen of Burlington.

For now, the fate of marriage equality in New Jersey hinges on finding another handful of such votes.